Tuesday, June 29, 2010

2nd Amendment Stands The Test...!


This must be the week for good news!

This story from the Houston Chronicle shows that we may have some hope yet! This is an important piece of legal news, because it deals with not only the federal government, but could affect the local and state governments as well!

Give a read...!

Supreme Court backs up right to bear arms
Associated Press
June 28, 2010, 10:23AM

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court held Monday that the Constitution's Second Amendment restrains government's ability to significantly limit "the right to keep and bear arms," advancing a recent trend by the John Roberts-led bench to embrace gun rights.

By a narrow, 5-4 vote, the justices also signaled, however, that some limitations on the right could survive legal challenges.

Writing for the court in a case involving restrictive laws in Chicago and one of its suburbs, Justice Samuel Alito said that the Second Amendment right "applies equally to the federal government and the states."

The court was split along familiar ideological lines, with five conservative-moderate justices in favor of gun rights and four liberals opposed. Chief Justice Roberts voted with the majority.

Two years ago, the court declared that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to possess guns, at least for purposes of self-defense in the home.

That ruling applied only to federal laws. It struck down a ban on handguns and a trigger lock requirement for other guns in the District of Columbia, a federal city with a unique legal standing. At the same time, the court was careful not to cast doubt on other regulations of firearms here.

Gun rights proponents almost immediately filed a federal lawsuit challenging gun control laws in Chicago and its suburb of Oak Park, Ill, where handguns have been banned for nearly 30 years. The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence says those laws appear to be the last two remaining outright bans.

Lower federal courts upheld the two laws, noting that judges on those benches were bound by Supreme Court precedent and that it would be up to the high court justices to ultimately rule on the true reach of the Second Amendment.

The Supreme Court already has said that most of the guarantees in the Bill of Rights serve as a check on state and local, as well as federal, laws.

Monday's decision did not explicitly strike down the Chicago area laws, ordering a federal appeals court to reconsider its ruling. But it left little doubt that they would eventually fall.

Still, Alito noted that the declaration that the Second Amendment is fully binding on states and cities "limits (but by no means eliminates) their ability to devise solutions to social problems that suit local needs and values."

The case is McDonald vs. City of Chicago.


It's nice to have the higher courts finally stand up and tell the government what "we the people" have always known! That is that the right to keep and bear arms is our "legal right" and is protected from the federal and the state governments...both by law and by force, if necessary!

About time the lawful citizens caught a break, especially from the higher courts! I love it!

How about some hot coffee or iced tea in the kitchen? Raining outside, so the kitchen will have to serve this time! OK?

13 comments:

dakotas5 said...

Morning Jim,
If you want to be thoroughly inspired,read Justice Thomas's opinion. We has at least one justice that gets it.

Beatrice P. Boyd said...

It's a pity thatthe government has to be told this when its very foundation is based on fighting and with guns.
While we're enjoying the coffee and iced tea, perhaps we should check our weapons too?

Momlady said...

Mind if I bring my .38?

Western Mass. Man said...

What's disturbing is that there were 4 justices who didn't agree with it.
Had Kagan been on the court it could have been 5 - 4 against it.
I'm not totally sure, but I believe Kagan will be replacing a liberal judge anyway so the outcome may have been the same.
That being said, brings me to Sotomayor. During her hearing last year she said she supported the 2nd amendment, but voted against this decision.
Go figure. Just tell them what they want to hear. I can hear Kagan doing the same.

Ben in Texas said...

We, citizens,have to fight the people in Congress who would whittle away our rights one at a time. If they could take away your gun rights,what's to stop them from moving on down the list? Vote!!! and Write letters to your Congressman.

Mechanic in Illinois said...

Liberty strikes back. Good thing they heard this case before the new left wing communist is confirmed by the liberal left senate. Sour grapes to the commies that want to take our rights. Next time Liberty may strike back with more then some votes. Thanks for another great lesson.

HermitJim said...

Hey Dakotas5...
Always good to see you! Thanks for suggesting the read! I'll have to go and check it out!

I can always stand a dose of inspiration!

Thanks for coming by today!


Hey Beatrice...
I guess that they just need to be reminded from time to time who they work for!

Thanks for coming by today!


Hey Momlady...
I think you are more than welcome to bring it, my friend! I certainly don't mind!

I am very glad you could drop by today!

HermitJim said...

Hey Western Mass. Man....
You just never know what makes the justices vote the way that they vote! It's very confusing to me at times, and certainly makes it hard to find how their mind works!

I'm happy that, for the moment, at least a few of them are showing some backbone!

Hey, thanks for coming by today!


Hey Ben...
More important than ever for us to stay informed and active in the political process than ever before! The next couple of years are going to put us all to the test!

Thanks, buddy, for coming by today!


Hey Mechanic...
I'm thinking that the PTB are very slowly starting to get the idea that they are being closely watched.

Doing the right thing is starting to seem like a wise move to most of them...let's hope it stays that way!

I appreciate the visit today!

Ashley said...

Oh... I see.... "Keep and bear arms." I thought it allowed us to keep bears. I guess I'll just have to stick with my dog and cat for now.

Still, AWESOME! I'm all for the right to own a gun. As has always been stated, gun laws don't prevent law-breakers from owning guns. That's why they're called "law-breakers". Not that I have ever owned a gun, but I've thought about getting one, and it's nice to have the option.

I half-expected the SC to rule in favor of the ban, because they focus on wording sometimes and avoid the spirit of the writings, but in this case even the wording doesn't specify "Congress shall make no laws concerning..." This particular clause says "shall not be infringed" and doesn't say who can't infringe it. So, good for them.

Hugs,
Ashley

Did it MY way said...

But the commie mayor of Chicago is already trying to undermine that decision.

When will these bleeding hearts just understand the 2nd ammendment?

Vote the bas#$rd out.

See Ya

HermitJim said...

Hey Ashley...
Thanks for the visit today!


Hey Tony...
Always going to be some jerk that thinks the bad guys will obey the laws! Gang bangers don't care if guns are illegal, only the good guys!

If ever protection was needed, it is the big cities!

Hey, thanks for stopping by today!

Tatersmama said...

I love it too!
Like Charlton Heston said:
“I'll give you my gun, when you take it from my cold, dead hands”

The 2nd Amendment of our Constitution should always be honored. If they can change one iota of that great document, they can change anything they want... when they want.

I'm off to renew my NRA membership now.

Anonymous said...

Yay!!!!! and just a little less than 17,000 murders last year.... Let's try for 20,000 this year!